DOE and Montana DEQ issue final EIS for North Plains Connector HVDC line, DOE/EIS-0568

What the record shows

The final EIS describes a 525-kilovolt high-voltage direct-current line plus three alternating-current lines, spanning about 422 miles, proposed by North Plains Connector LLC, a Grid United company [2]. Montana DEQ describes the line as carrying 3,000 megawatts between the Western grid and Eastern states [6].

The project has four line segments [2]:

• the Rosebud Transmission Line, two parallel 500-kV AC circuits of about 3 miles each, from NorthWestern Energy’s Colstrip Substation to a new converter station in Rosebud County, Montana;
• the HVDC Transmission Line, about 172 miles in Montana and about 170 miles in North Dakota, ending at a new converter station in Morton County, North Dakota;
• the Oliver Transmission Line, about 52 miles of 345-kV AC line to a substation Minnesota Power is developing separately in Oliver County, the interconnection point with the Midcontinent Independent System Operator;
• the Morton Transmission Line, about 22 miles of 345-kV AC line to a new switchyard near St. Anthony, the interconnection point with the Southwest Power Pool.

The EIS analyzes one route, Alternative D, against a no-action alternative. It says that of the alignments studied, “only one was considered reasonable as well as technically and financially feasible” [2]. Montana DEQ identified that route as its preferred alternative, citing avoidance of residential and commercial areas and “greater local acceptance” from landowners and officials reported by the developer [2].

The route would occupy about 10,128 acres of maintained right-of-way [2]. Of its length, 49.5 miles cross state or federal land: 17.0 miles of Montana state land, 4.7 miles of North Dakota state land, 9.8 miles of Bureau of Land Management land, 10.2 miles of National Forest System land and 7.9 miles of Agricultural Research Service land [2]. The other 372.2 miles cross private land and roads [2].

Other figures in the executive summary [2]:

The executive summary says the analysis found “minimal-to-no impact” on air quality, public health and safety, groundwater, surface water and noise [2]. It warns that construction housing demand “could strain an already limited supply of affordable rental housing” [2].

On procedure, the final EIS relies on DOE, Interior and Agriculture NEPA procedures and notes that the Council on Environmental Quality has rescinded its NEPA regulations; it says the document may refer to the CEQ rules as they stood when the notice of intent was issued [2]. This site covered CEQ’s related withdrawal of 18 NEPA guidance documents in July.

Where it sits in the process

DOE opened scoping with a notice of intent on October 25, 2024, at 89 FR 85182 [8]. That notice said DOE was leading the review under section 216(h) of the Federal Power Act but did “not have the authority or responsibility to make decisions” on the developer’s applications to BLM, the Forest Service and the Agricultural Research Service [8].

That changed on paper on November 19, 2025. DOE’s amended notice at 90 FR 52047 said the agency “does have a decision-making role” on the North Plains Connector Interregional Innovation award under the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships program [7]. DOE announced the conditional award of up to $700 million to the Montana Department of Commerce in August 2024; the state would disburse an estimated $605 million of it to the developer, in phases tied to conditions [7]. DOE did not reopen scoping [7].

The draft EIS followed on January 9, 2026, with comments due February 23 [9]. The final EIS says DOE received no comments from Indian tribes on the draft [2].

What decisions are still pending on the North Plains Connector?

Five, by the final EIS’s own list [2]:

• DOE: whether to finalize the conditional GRIP award, to be documented in a record of decision.
• Montana DEQ: whether to issue a Certificate of Compliance under the Major Facility Siting Act for the Montana segments. DEQ says it must wait 15 days after publication of the final EIS before issuing its record of decision and certificate [6].
• BLM: whether to grant, grant with conditions or deny a 30-year right-of-way grant across its Miles City Field Office lands.
• Forest Service: a special-use decision for about 10 miles of the Little Missouri National Grassland.
• Agricultural Research Service: an easement across about 8 miles of the Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Laboratory.

North Dakota’s Public Service Commission runs its own siting review, separate from the joint federal-Montana document [8].

A grid filing is moving on a separate track. FERC’s August 14 combined notice lists a Southwest Power Pool filing in Docket No. ER26-3477-000 described as “4986 North Plains Connector and Basin Electric HVDC Int Agr,” with a requested effective date of October 11, 2026, and comments due September 1 [10].

Positions on the record

Appendix I reproduces the substantive comments on the draft and the agencies’ replies [4].

Montana Environmental Information Center. Nick Fitzmaurice wrote that the group “would appreciate a more robust analysis of project alternatives in this EIS,” and asked for clarity on why Alternative E was dropped [4]. The response says Alternative E was dismissed after landowner and agency coordination raised tribal-resource and wildlife concerns along the Tongue River, and that its replacement, Alternative C, was itself revised into the proposed route [4]. The center also urged use of local and union labor [4].

A landowner favoring a northern route. William Krutzfeldt argued for Alternative A, citing wildfire access, mule deer already under “generational stress” and sage-grouse leks [4]. The agencies replied that existing transmission easements held by another energy company make that route technically infeasible, and that it would add about 20 miles of centerline [4].

Federal reviewers. David Dorian of EPA asked that the final EIS identify public wells and impaired waters; the document now does [4]. Courtney Hoover, commenting for Interior, raised Deer Medicine Rocks National Historic Landmark; the agencies said a fall 2025 viewshed analysis shows no structures would be visible from it [2, 4].

Supporters. Rosebud County commissioners Scott Hein, Ed Joiner and Robert E. Lee signed a letter stating, “I support this project fully!” [4]. Form-letter commenters said greater connectivity could meet Montana’s needs “without having to build more expensive power plants” [4].

Whether DOE signs a record of decision finalizing the $605 million, and on what conditions, is not yet in the record [2, 7].

Reading-room questions

Questions readers bring to this record, answered from the documents cited below.

Has DOE approved the $605 million GRIP grant for the North Plains Connector?

No. The final EIS says DOE still has to decide whether to finalize the conditional award, and that decision will be recorded in a DOE record of decision [2]. The federal money would flow to the Montana Department of Commerce, which would pass about $605 million to the developer in phases [7].

When can Montana issue the North Plains Connector siting certificate?

Montana DEQ says it must wait 15 days after the final EIS is published before issuing its record of decision and the Major Facility Siting Act certificate [6]. The certificate is required before construction can begin in Montana [6].

How much federal land does the North Plains Connector cross?

About 27.9 miles: 9.8 miles of BLM land and 7.9 miles of Agricultural Research Service land in Montana, and 10.2 miles of National Forest System land in North Dakota [2]. State trust lands account for another 21.7 miles, and about 372.2 miles are private land or roads [2].

When would construction of the North Plains Connector start?

The developer anticipates starting construction in 2027 and taking about three to four years, according to the final EIS [2]. That schedule depends on federal and state permits that had not been issued as of August 28, 2026 [2, 6].

Will the North Plains Connector raise electric rates in Montana?

The rate study in the final EIS, prepared by the Montana Consumer Counsel, says the effect on Montana ratepayers cannot be calculated yet because utility commitments are non-binding and no cost estimates have been produced [3].

Note on sourcing

This report draws on the final EIS's executive summary and its chapters on purpose and need, alternatives, the preferred alternative and consultation, and on Appendices H and I; it does not draw on the remaining appendices. The 3,000-megawatt capacity figure comes from Montana DEQ's release and the Montana Consumer Counsel study, not from the EIS chapters cited here. The $3.2 billion cost estimate and the five utilities' capacity memorandums are as reported in the Consumer Counsel study, which is dated September 2025 and describes the memorandums as non-binding; they have not been checked against company filings. The interconnection agreement in FERC Docket No. ER26-3477 is described as the Commission's combined notice lists it; this report does not draw on the filing itself. No DOE, BLM, Forest Service, Agricultural Research Service or Montana DEQ decision on the project had been issued as of publication. Grid United and its project company had not commented on the final EIS in the record cited here.

Sources

1. DOE/EIS-0568: Final Environmental Impact Statement (August 2026)U.S. Department of Energy, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, August 28, 2026 · energy.gov
2. North Plains Connector Project, Final Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0568U.S. Department of Energy and Montana Department of Environmental Quality, August 24, 2026 · energy.gov
3. Final EIS, Appendix H, Final Rate Impact Study (Montana Consumer Counsel)U.S. Department of Energy and Montana Department of Environmental Quality, August 25, 2026 · energy.gov
4. Final EIS, Appendix I, Response to Public CommentsU.S. Department of Energy and Montana Department of Environmental Quality, August 25, 2026 · energy.gov
5. Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability, 91 FR 55579 (FR Doc. 2026-17606)Federal Register (EPA), August 28, 2026 · federalregister.gov
6. DEQ Issues Final Environmental Review for North Plains Connector ProjectMontana Department of Environmental Quality, August 28, 2026 · deq.mt.gov
7. Amended Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed North Plains Connector Project, Colstrip, MT to Center/St. Anthony, ND, 90 FR 52047 (FR Doc. 2025-20267)Federal Register (DOE), November 19, 2025 · federalregister.gov
8. Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed North Plains Connector Project, Colstrip, Montana to Center/St. Anthony, North Dakota, 89 FR 85182 (FR Doc. 2024-24879)Federal Register (DOE), October 25, 2024 · federalregister.gov
9. Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability, 91 FR 997 (FR Doc. 2026-00252)Federal Register (EPA), January 9, 2026 · federalregister.gov
10. Combined Notice of Filings #1, 91 FR 52678 (FR Doc. 2026-16632)Federal Register (FERC), August 14, 2026 · federalregister.gov

Subject headings

• DOE
• transmission
• NEPA
• HVDC
• Montana
• North Dakota
• BLM
• GRIP

Cross-references

Other register entries filed under the same subject headings.

1. Nov. 5, 2026No. 0031 · Floor order · 2 shared headingsSenate order sets Nov. 9 cloture vote on motion to proceed to H.R. 2347, the vehicle for a permitting package
2. Sept. 22, 2026No. 0025 · Environmental review · 2 shared headingsBLM opens supplemental EIS on Seminoe Pumped Storage Project, moving FERC license order to October 2027, P-14787-004
3. Sept. 9, 2026No. 0022 · Report · 2 shared headingsBLM proposes 60-day permitting track for NPR-A oil production sites, RIN 1004-AF57, 91 FR 57091